|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Oct 6, 2009 10:34:09 GMT -5
Any opinions about the David Letterman story? Personally, I'm not as concerned with the relationships part as I am the blackmail part. I think that's more important, though there's the concern that the relationships were coerced and the fact, apparently true, he was seeing these women while he was dating his wife before they were married, though even then ...
Any thoughts? I'd especially like to hear from the female members.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 6, 2009 11:29:48 GMT -5
I wrote this elsewhere: Agreed. The extortionist should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law but I am not letting ole' Dave off the hook so easily. He was having sex with female staffers, women(plural by Dave's own admission) who worked for him and who would have to depend upon his whims for continued employment. I would not be surprised if this arrest and prosecution of the alleged extortionist, coupled with the on-air admission by Dave of sexual affairs with female staffers, opens the door to sexual harassment lawsuit(s) being filed against him and perhaps rightfully so. If some of the women had felt pressured to participate in such affairs or even to remain silent or else lose their jobs and be blackballed in the industry, this will embolden them not to remain indentured servants. Just don't extort money from Dave but go through the administrative and legal proceedings set up to protect such sexually harassed employees. These affairs may very well have been completely consensual with no strings attached but it is so dangerous and in very bad form for an employer to have sexual relations with his employees. Not to mention the hurt this will cause Dave's long-time partner now wife. I did read an article on msnbc.com or cnn.com that television comedians were giving Letterman a pass or going easy on him. That kind of rubbed me wrong as Dave never gave any slack to anyone, even talking about Sarah Palin's teenage daughter sexually. Here is a video from cnn.com where comedian Lewis Black blasts media coverage of Letterman saying it should be kept private. Nonsense, says I. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Letterman got rich deriding public officials and celebrities about their sexcapades. Welcome to the club Dave!
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Oct 6, 2009 12:05:51 GMT -5
I wrote this elsewhere: Agreed. The extortionist should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law but I am not letting ole' Dave off the hook so easily. He was having sex with female staffers, women(plural by Dave's own admission) who worked for him and who would have to depend upon his whims for continued employment. I would not be surprised if this arrest and prosecution of the alleged extortionist, coupled with the on-air admission by Dave of sexual affairs with female staffers, opens the door to sexual harassment lawsuit(s) being filed against him and perhaps rightfully so. If some of the women had felt pressured to participate in such affairs or even to remain silent or else lose their jobs and be blackballed in the industry, this will embolden them not to remain indentured servants. Just don't extort money from Dave but go through the administrative and legal proceedings set up to protect such sexually harassed employees. These affairs may very well have been completely consensual with no strings attached but it is so dangerous and in very bad form for an employer to have sexual relations with his employees. Not to mention the hurt this will cause Dave's long-time partner now wife. I did read an article on msnbc.com or cnn.com that television comedians were giving Letterman a pass or going easy on him. That kind of rubbed me wrong as Dave never gave any slack to anyone, even talking about Sarah Palin's teenage daughter sexually. Here is a video from cnn.com where comedian Lewis Black blasts media coverage of Letterman saying it should be kept private. Nonsense, says I. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Letterman got rich deriding public officials and celebrities about their sexcapades. Welcome to the club Dave! I love Letterman, but you are exactly right on this one. He should have kept his mouth shut and negotiated a settlement in private. It happens all the time, but the stubborn boy still hasn't gotten over Leno's bypassing on The Tonight Show. He's got a chip on his shoulder and is using humor and his power in trying to defuse this situation. I think CBS should replace him with Leno. That would knock that chip off for good.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Oct 6, 2009 13:57:17 GMT -5
I don't thnk Worldwide Pants is exempt from having to have a sexual harassment policy (paging legal guru JSD here.)
It's interesting that Dave apologized to his wife last night on the show. I didn't see it but I understand that's what happened. If he is "innocent" and the affairs were all conducted prior to the marriage, what's with the public apology?
Some people on other boards (namely, guys) seem to think that as long as Dave and Regina weren't married when he carried on with his employees, so what. Well, if he and Regina were living together and Regina thought it was an exclusive relationship, that's not cool. These same guys also think that it's totally cool to screw the intern, the secretary, or any other employee. Sometimes I think we're still in the stone age.
Unless that Halderman dude is totally delusional, I wonder what he had would have been worth $2 million. Certainly info that Dave had consensual affairs was not worth that much!!!
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Oct 6, 2009 18:18:42 GMT -5
I wrote this elsewhere: I did read an article on msnbc.com or cnn.com that television comedians were giving Letterman a pass or going easy on him. That kind of rubbed me wrong as Dave never gave any slack to anyone, even talking about Sarah Palin's teenage daughter sexually. Here is a video from cnn.com where comedian Lewis Black blasts media coverage of Letterman saying it should be kept private. Nonsense, says I. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Letterman got rich deriding public officials and celebrities about their sexcapades. Welcome to the club Dave! I love Letterman, but you are exactly right on this one. He should have kept his mouth shut and negotiated a settlement in private. It happens all the time, but the stubborn boy still hasn't gotten over Leno's bypassing on The Tonight Show. He's got a chip on his shoulder and is using humor and his power in trying to defuse this situation. I think CBS should replace him with Leno. That would knock that chip off for good. Negotiated a settlement in private for what? The blackmail? The alleged harrassment? I agree he still hasn't forgetten the NBC bypass, but replace him with Leno? Nah.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 6, 2009 19:15:53 GMT -5
There need not be a trial for Robert Halderman because msnbc blowhard Keith Olberscum has declared him guilty based on Olberscum's personal knowledge of the guy. Thanks Keith for saving us taxpayers lots of money on a criminal trial since you know everything.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 6, 2009 22:06:08 GMT -5
. . . Personally, I'm not as concerned with the relationships part as I am the blackmail part . . . I'm kinda of that school of thought, too. It's just fucking. Blackmail is against the law and, if Letterman used his power to compel the sex, that would be against the law. But, good ol' ordinary shtupping between adults is of no concern to me. There's making love and having sex. They are not the same in my world. That' just my view. I will not argue it. I know others will disagree and will have the right to do so. I will not impose this view on others. I know the arguments other people will make on so many levels. That's okay. To each his/her own.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 6, 2009 23:08:30 GMT -5
I don't thnk Worldwide Pants is exempt from having to have a sexual harassment policy (paging legal guru JSD here.) It's interesting that Dave apologized to his wife last night on the show. I didn't see it but I understand that's what happened. If he is "innocent" and the affairs were all conducted prior to the marriage, what's with the public apology? Some people on other boards (namely, guys) seem to think that as long as Dave and Regina weren't married when he carried on with his employees, so what. Well, if he and Regina were living together and Regina thought it was an exclusive relationship, that's not cool. These same guys also think that it's totally cool to screw the intern, the secretary, or any other employee. Sometimes I think we're still in the stone age. Unless that Halderman dude is totally delusional, I wonder what he had would have been worth $2 million. Certainly info that Dave had consensual affairs was not worth that much!!! I agree with you, scousette, that it is not okay for an employer as powerful as Letterman(or any employer, even the manager of my local Dairy Barn) to have sexual relations with employees. The players are of unequal bargaining power. It would be interesting to see Worldwide Pants' and CBS's sexual harassment policies. Letterman thinks this is pretty funny as he makes jokes about it and apologizes publicly to his wife. What, aren't he and his wife ever home alone together where he can apologize face to face and not in the comfort and safety zone of his show where he can get some laughs and won't have a wife rightfully get in his face and scream, cry and curse at him? His "apology" seems pretty safe and tidy to me. I heard tonight on one of the network news shows that Letterman and his people did at first negotiate with this guy until he increased his demands to $2 million! So much for integrity and openness. The police weren't called until the price got too high. Don't get me wrong, Halderman should be prosecuted assuming that there is evidence to back up the charges although he is innocent until proven guilty despite what Keith Olberman says. Now if Dave was shagging his rich and famous guests, that is different as there is then parity in economic power or at least the starlets aren't as beholden to Dave as his female employees are. Still, it is a hurtful thing to do to his long-time partner, now wife. It sounds like Halderman should have just given Dave a good ass whipping for screwing his fiancee but extortion is too much and suggests that this guy didn't love his partner but just saw a chance to capitalize on a tryst.
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Oct 7, 2009 14:01:29 GMT -5
. . . Personally, I'm not as concerned with the relationships part as I am the blackmail part . . . I'm kinda of that school of thought, too. It's just fucking. Blackmail is against the law and, if Letterman used his power to compel the sex, that would be against the law. But, good ol' ordinary shtupping between adults is of no concern to me. There's making love and having sex. They are not the same in my world. That' just my view. I will not argue it. I know others will disagree and will have the right to do so. I will not impose this view on others. I know the arguments other people will make on so many levels. That's okay. To each his/her own. I'm not gonna argue with you on this one for the fact that I agree with you on almost everything else. Blackmail is wrong and I I agree. But it probably would be in Letterman's interest to have hushed this up if he could. Then again, ratings are through the roof. I wouldn't be surprised if he resumes his employee shagging if the ratings bonanza continues. He'll just pass it off as another innocent tryst in his monologue.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 7, 2009 15:17:17 GMT -5
I'm kinda of that school of thought, too. It's just fucking. Blackmail is against the law and, if Letterman used his power to compel the sex, that would be against the law. But, good ol' ordinary shtupping between adults is of no concern to me. There's making love and having sex. They are not the same in my world. That' just my view. I will not argue it. I know others will disagree and will have the right to do so. I will not impose this view on others. I know the arguments other people will make on so many levels. That's okay. To each his/her own. I'm not gonna argue with you on this one for the fact that I agree with you on almost everything else. Blackmail is wrong and I I agree. But it probably would be in Letterman's interest to have hushed this up if he could. Then again, ratings are through the roof. I wouldn't be surprised if he resumes his employee shagging if the ratings bonanza continues. He'll just pass it off as another innocent tryst in his monologue. No kidding. Dave will come out smelling like a rose: he is the possible victim of a crime for sympathy and his admitting to shagging his employees, the women he can fire, is getting him laughs and a rating boost. Every politician from Gary Hart to Mark Sanford is thinking, "I'm in the wrong business!"
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 7, 2009 19:12:34 GMT -5
Here's the big story for me. Why would any woman want to fuck David Letterman anyway? I can think of a lot of wealthy, powerful, and attractive men that I wouldn't begrudge a woman wanting to do. But, Letterman? Is it that "funny" thing I keep hearing women talk about? I don't get it? What's so big about "funny"?
"I want a man who can make me laugh," is something you always hear. It's above looks, body type, money - everything! Women, what is it with "funny"? Urgggggh! Women are such dopes sometimes. (Yes, I know, men are such dopes all the time)I get $. I get power. I get looks. I get the hunk thing. I perfectly understand the allure of the big 10 inch. "Funny"? Uh, uh. Does not compute. Someone, anyone, please 'splain.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 7, 2009 22:06:08 GMT -5
Here's the big story for me. Why would any woman want to fuck David Letterman anyway? I can think of a lot of wealthy, powerful, and attractive men that I wouldn't begrudge a woman wanting to do. But, Letterman? Is it that "funny" thing I keep hearing women talk about? I don't get it? What's so big about "funny"? "I want a man who can make me laugh," is something you always hear. It's above looks, body type, money - everything! Women, what is it with "funny"? Urgggggh! Women are such dopes sometimes. (Yes, I know, men are such dopes all the time)I get $. I get power. I get looks. I get the hunk thing. I perfectly understand the allure of the big 10 inch. "Funny"? Uh, uh. Does not compute. Someone, anyone, please 'splain. How does Rosie O'Donnell get hot babes shacking up with her? One word: celebrity.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Oct 7, 2009 22:26:52 GMT -5
I'm not gonna argue with you on this one for the fact that I agree with you on almost everything else. Blackmail is wrong and I I agree. But it probably would be in Letterman's interest to have hushed this up if he could. Then again, ratings are through the roof. I wouldn't be surprised if he resumes his employee shagging if the ratings bonanza continues. He'll just pass it off as another innocent tryst in his monologue. No kidding. Dave will come out smelling like a rose: he is the possible victim of a crime for sympathy and his admitting to shagging his employees, the women he can fire, is getting him laughs and a rating boost. Every politician from Gary Hart to Mark Sanford is thinking, "I'm in the wrong business!" He very well may come out of this with his show intact, but I'll bet you his marraige is all but over by year's end, since he was banging his girlfriends after he got married. Call me old fashioned, but he has no respect for his wife or their marraige, treating both as if they did not exist. Doesn't say much for the man's integrity as a human being. Not someone I would call a friend. Hope he enjoys his 60 minutes of laughs every evening and his rolls in the hay with his bimbos. With that lifestyle, it can be pretty lonely outside his career, especially after it is over. Just ask Gary Hart or John Edwards.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 7, 2009 22:55:01 GMT -5
How does Rosie O'Donnell get hot babes shacking up with her? One word: celebrity. I don't think that is the answer. I bet people who work with celebrities for years get to a point where they don't see them as celebrities. They're just "the boss," or just "Dave." Just as I doubt Paul McCartney's closet friends see him as "Paul McCartney." What I'm questioning is something that is seen in the "real" world, too. With all things being equal, "funny" seems to get women all the time. Even in the celebrity world, I bet women who live in that world value "funny" more that any other quality - at least at the early part of a relationship.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Oct 8, 2009 13:15:40 GMT -5
Here's the big story for me. Why would any woman want to fuck David Letterman anyway? I can think of a lot of wealthy, powerful, and attractive men that I wouldn't begrudge a woman wanting to do. But, Letterman? Is it that "funny" thing I keep hearing women talk about? I don't get it? What's so big about "funny"? "I want a man who can make me laugh," is something you always hear. It's above looks, body type, money - everything! Women, what is it with "funny"? Urgggggh! Women are such dopes sometimes. (Yes, I know, men are such dopes all the time)I get $. I get power. I get looks. I get the hunk thing. I perfectly understand the allure of the big 10 inch. "Funny"? Uh, uh. Does not compute. Someone, anyone, please 'splain. David Letterman does nothing for me. I don't think he's particularly funny. But funny/sense of humor does matter to me as far as what I find attractive about a man. If a guy is humorless, he ain't getting anywhere with me. And he has to have a certain kind of humor. A guy who thinks he's funny usually isn't. Maybe it's because laughter releases endorphins or something. BTW, the 10 inch schlong is not all that. So, is it confirmed that Dave contined to bang his female employees while he was married? If so, he's a POS.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Oct 9, 2009 6:49:00 GMT -5
"BTW, the 10 inch schlong is not all that. That's average isn't it? About 25cm? I always thought it was.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 9, 2009 11:42:31 GMT -5
Letterman, folks, Letterman! The newest reports are suggesting trouble in Daveland. Wife is devastated, male staffers mad that they weren't getting on-air time or star treatment like the female staffers that were Dave's lovers, etc. The woman who was with both men is on paid leave of absence but is said to be "banned" from the set though.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Oct 9, 2009 13:21:42 GMT -5
Letterman, folks, Letterman! The newest reports are suggesting trouble in Daveland. Wife is devastated, male staffers mad that they weren't getting on-air time or star treatment like the female staffers that were Dave's lovers, etc. The woman who was with both men is on paid leave of absence but is said to be "banned" from the set though. Uh-oh.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 9, 2009 15:41:36 GMT -5
Letterman, folks, Letterman! The newest reports are suggesting trouble in Daveland. Wife is devastated, male staffers mad that they weren't getting on-air time or star treatment like the female staffers that were Dave's lovers, etc. The woman who was with both men is on paid leave of absence but is said to be "banned" from the set though. Uh-oh. Ever notice how Scousette is practically nowehere to be found around here until there's a lot of "Goss-ip, Goss-ip"? ;D
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 10, 2009 19:30:12 GMT -5
NOW Goes After David Letterman Over Affairs With Female Staffers Wednesday, October 07, 2009
By Catherine Donaldson-Evans
The National Organization for Women has put David Letterman in its crosshairs.
NOW issued a strongly worded statement Tuesday night saying the late-night host created a "toxic environment" for his female employees by having sex with several young staff members over the years.
Letterman admitted to having multiple affairs last week after a CBS News producer allegedly threatened to blackmail him.
NOW President Terry O'Neill blasted the late-night funnyman, saying the affairs were classic examples of sexual harassment in the workplace.
"As 'the boss,' he is responsible for setting the tone for his entire workplace — and he did that with sex," O'Neill said. "This places all employees — including employees who happen to be women — in an awkward, confusing and demoralizing situation."
A powerful man with a public forum like Letterman, O'Neill said, can get away with turning women into sex objects because "he can crack a few jokes and publicly apologize for his mistakes."
"It is this kind of hypocrisy that perpetuates the image of men in power preying on women, while many look the other way," O'Neill said.
NOW urged CBS to take immediate action against Letterman for his lewd behavior — but so far, it has stopped short of calling on the network to drop his show.
"The National Organization for Women calls on CBS ... to take action immediately to rectify this situation," O'Neill said.
But, she added: "With just two women on CBS' board of directors, we're not holding our breath."
Also coming down hard against Letterman is celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, a women's rights activist whose California firm specializes in sexual harassment cases. She is urging Letterman's former and current employees to take him to court.
"I think the best way to get (the message) out to Letterman is to sue him," Allred told FOXNews.com.
Allred, known for her publicity stunts and representation of high-profile clients, paraded down a Hollywood movie premiere red carpet Tuesday night carrying an open letter she penned to the "Late Show" host that read in part, "David Letterman, Just Say No to Sex in Your Workplace."
She was coy when asked whether her involvement is an attempt to woo Letterman's staff members to hire her if they decide to sue the comedian.
"If somebody contacted me, I'd have to explore the facts," Allred told FOXNews.com.
Longtime CBS News producer Robert "Joe" Halderman, 51, was charged last week with trying to extort $2 million from Letterman in exchange for keeping silent about the affairs. Letterman has since apologized for his behavior to his wife, family, staff and fans on his show.
Founded in 1966, NOW has more than 500,000 contributing members in all 50 states, according to its Web site.
This isn't the first time the group has come out against Letterman and other celebrities for what it sees as offensive and sexist comments.
In June, NOW blasted Letterman for inappropriate jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughters, the oldest of whom got pregnant while in high school.
"Comedians in search of a laugh should really know better than to snicker about men having sex with teenage girls (or young women) less than half their age," NOW said then in a statement on its Web site. "The sexualization of girls and women in the media is reaching new lows these days."
NOW also pressured NBC and CBS to drop shock radio host Don Imus after he called Rutgers University women's basketball players "nappy-headed hos" in 2007. Ultimately, both networks did.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Oct 11, 2009 14:13:09 GMT -5
Ever notice how Scousette is practically nowehere to be found around here until there's a lot of "Goss-ip, Goss-ip"? ;D Stalker!
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Oct 13, 2009 19:24:26 GMT -5
Ever notice how Scousette is practically nowehere to be found around here until there's a lot of "Goss-ip, Goss-ip"? ;D This may be true. But in her absence, you magnify and make gossip your own. Well done you overachiever.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 14, 2009 6:13:33 GMT -5
This may be true. But in her absence, you magnify and make gossip your own. Well done you overachiever. Examples please, if you can put that crack pipe down?
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Oct 14, 2009 14:41:37 GMT -5
This may be true. But in her absence, you magnify and make gossip your own. Well done you overachiever. Examples please, if you can put that crack pipe down? The crack pipe was retired a long time ago. Yes, I did the crack. And oh what a wonderful experience it was and wasn't. Blew a major hole in my wallet. The high was the high of all-time. The low was the low of all-time. Pick your poison on this one if you dare. I would highly recommend that you stick to your convictions on this drug. Then again, you would have the ultimate drug experience and subsequently get off my back. Smoke the crack and get back to me you inexperienced blowhard that continues to pass judgment in areas of no expertise.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 14, 2009 19:22:09 GMT -5
. . . But funny/sense of humor does matter to me as far as what I find attractive about a man. If a guy is humorless, he ain't getting anywhere with me. And he has to have a certain kind of humor . . . So, you confirm my statement. So, what is it about "funny" for women. If a man was all that and a bag of chips, but was humorless, he'd get nowhere with you. Conversely, if a man left a lot to be desired in regards to money, looks, height, weight, etc, but was your kine of funny, he'd have a chance. That's okay. I'm not criticizing. I just need a woman to really explain this "funny" thing. I wonder if it's some kind of throwback to prehistory - funny equals safe or something else.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Oct 14, 2009 19:52:23 GMT -5
. . . But funny/sense of humor does matter to me as far as what I find attractive about a man. If a guy is humorless, he ain't getting anywhere with me. And he has to have a certain kind of humor . . . So, you confirm my statement. So, what is it about "funny" for women. If a man was all that and a bag of chips, but was humorless, he'd get nowhere with you. Conversely, if a man left a lot to be desired in regards to money, looks, height, weight, etc, but was your kine of funny, he'd have a chance. That's okay. I'm not criticizing. I just need a woman to really explain this "funny" thing. I wonder if it's some kind of throwback to prehistory - funny equals safe or something else. The results of the study reported in this article explain it pretty well. www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/02/women.funny.men.intelligent/index.htmlWhy funny guys get the babes •Study: Women rate funny guys as more intelligent and honest •The research relates to model that women look for men who can give resources •Humor is also an important part of friendships, author says By Elizabeth Landau CNN (CNN) -- Attention, single dudes: Women want you to make them laugh. Women say they are more likely to have a long-term relationship with guys who present themselves as funny. According to new research, women rate funny guys as more intelligent than guys who are not so funny. The research was presented this week at the British Psychological Society Annual Conference in Brighton, England. "Over the course of history, women actively look for signs that their man is intelligent, and I believe the ability to actively judge the situation and pull off a joke and make you laugh is an intelligent feat," said Kristofor McCarty, a researcher at Northumbria University in Newcastle, England, and author of the study, in an e-mail. McCarty's study asked 45 heterosexual women aged 18 to 30 to rate various self-descriptions of men, some funnier than others. He invented the fictional lives of 10 men and then created a funny and not-so-funny vignette from each of their perspectives. Then, participants read all 20 descriptions and rated them on qualities such as likeliness of friendship, likeliness of long-term relationship, honesty and intelligence. One example the study designated as high-quality humor was this: "I was standing in a mental illness ward the other day when I heard a doctor speaking to a new nurse on the ward. He was really giving her a telling-off, and his parting words were, 'And remember, when it's busy, don't go around saying it's a madhouse,' " McCarty said. By contrast, a statement low on amusement was, "I was out skiing last year when I ended up slipping all the way down the mountain." To set a general standard of humor, McCarty did a preliminary study to test which jokes and humorous statements were the funniest on 35 females aged 18 to 30. Women said the men with the funniest descriptions were significantly more likely to be candidates for long-term relationships, as well as friends. Participants also rated the more amusing men as more intelligent and honest. Previous research in evolutionary psychology has indicated that for long-term mating, women value a man's likelihood of acquiring resources: for instance, someone likely to earn a good salary. That idea recalls the early days of humans, when women relied on men's resources during childbearing years. The study, though small in sample size, also relates to this model. A more intelligent person is less likely to fall into traps, McCarty said, and may be more able to provide for a mate and children. Read more about the brain and human behavior Given that laughing makes people feel better, it also makes sense evolutionarily that women would prefer men with a good sense of humor, especially to help with the hardships of taking care of children, said Helen Fisher, biological anthropologist and author of the recent book "Why Him? Why Her? Finding Real Love by Understanding Your Personality Type." "People who have a good sense of humor may be likely to lighten up very bad situations and therefore reduce the stress response and simply enable you to get over the hump in bad parts of the relationship," said Fisher, who was not involved with McCarty's study. Humor also helps creativity, said Peter Derks, professor emeritus of psychology at the College of William and Mary in Virginia, who did not work on McCarty's study. The field of positive psychology -- which looks at well-being and happiness -- posits that humor leads to happiness and happiness leads to health, he said. This suggests that humor does have some survival value as well. But humor is not used only in long-term sexual relationships, McCarty said. It plays an important role among friends and "also developed as a desired trait in friendship for social reasons," he said. Do men also think funny women are more intelligent and honest? Time constraints prevented McCarty from exploring this question, but he said research suggests that men don't care much about women's sense of humor. "A man wants a woman who laughs at his jokes and is not too bothered if his girl isn't funny at all," McCarty said. On the other hand, Derks said, researchers have found that women who are good at being funny -- eliciting laughter -- are seen as positively as are funny men.
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Oct 16, 2009 11:16:30 GMT -5
. . . But funny/sense of humor does matter to me as far as what I find attractive about a man. If a guy is humorless, he ain't getting anywhere with me. And he has to have a certain kind of humor . . . So, you confirm my statement. So, what is it about "funny" for women. If a man was all that and a bag of chips, but was humorless, he'd get nowhere with you. Conversely, if a man left a lot to be desired in regards to money, looks, height, weight, etc, but was your kine of funny, he'd have a chance. That's okay. I'm not criticizing. I just need a woman to really explain this "funny" thing. I wonder if it's some kind of throwback to prehistory - funny equals safe or something else. Listen up Sayne. Everybody wants to hang around someone who is funny. The difference between us and the female gender is that they are the ones who choose. We don't choose, they do. That is the way nature works in all the species. So, women are going to choose a man that makes her laugh, and all the other qualities of that man are important but not critical. And if you can combine being funny with other good qualities, then you have got her. Now let us talk about you. I think you are funny. That doesn't mean I want you. It means I would rather converse with you more than converse with other certain members on this board. Better yet, you are smart and funny. Something special if you ask me. And last but not least, I agree with almost all your views. Humor is the greatest quality, followed by a sense of humility that you can also laugh at. I would never marry a girl because she was drop dead gorgeous and good in bed. She would have to have a sense of humor as well and be able to make me laugh. That is my take.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 16, 2009 21:43:14 GMT -5
. . . Now let us talk about you. I think you are funny. That doesn't mean I want you. It means I would rather converse with you more than converse with other certain members on this board. Better yet, you are smart and funny. Something special if you ask me. And last but not least, I agree with almost all your views . . . I love you, man!
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 16, 2009 21:48:27 GMT -5
. . . According to new research, women rate funny guys as more intelligent than guys who are not so funny . . . So, why don't they like the Three Stooges? ;D
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 17, 2009 9:23:52 GMT -5
Here's the big story for me. Why would any woman want to fuck David Letterman anyway? I can think of a lot of wealthy, powerful, and attractive men that I wouldn't begrudge a woman wanting to do. But, Letterman? Is it that "funny" thing I keep hearing women talk about? I don't get it? What's so big about "funny"? "I want a man who can make me laugh," is something you always hear. It's above looks, body type, money - everything! Women, what is it with "funny"? Urgggggh! Women are such dopes sometimes. (Yes, I know, men are such dopes all the time)I get $. I get power. I get looks. I get the hunk thing. I perfectly understand the allure of the big 10 inch. "Funny"? Uh, uh. Does not compute. Someone, anyone, please 'splain. hey bud, you have to be cocky and funny. that combination. not just funny. women respond to emotional cues unlike us guys, they don't respond to logic. we are like a light switch, we see a girl and we know in 2 seconds if we want to sleep with her. a woman is the opposite , she will decide in 2 seconds if she will never sleep with you but if you have good material then that becomes she may sleep with you. having a sense of humor demonstrates higher value and this is what women want on a subconscious level. everything is based on value. their power is their sexuality and once you start supplicating to a woman like a little puppy dog the game is over which is why you need to be cocky as well.
|
|